HOI4 Guide - New Infrastructure Meta
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 05. 2024
- #hoi4 #heartsofiron4
The Ultimate Guide on Infrastructure. Which is the best strategy, when and where is it good to build Infrastructure. . The guide will give you a quick answer but also go in depth into the economy of HOI4 and help you to understand what actually happens with graphs and examples.
• HOI4 Guide - When shou...
0:00 Why do i get it right?
0:45 The quick answer
1:08 How do i compare the results
1:35 Why is infrastructure so hard to get right
2:59 The basics to understand the results
4:31 The results for September 1939, DoW
8:42 The results for May 1941, Barbarossa
9:40 The results for June 1942
10:12 Conclusion - Hry
I like excel sheets. Keep em coming. I always thought infra like "if I have at least 2 years to war and at least 3 civ or 4 mills to build, max out infra first, especially if you have resources on the state". I'm glad I'm justified with math and logic.
A game that cant be played with excel-sheet is no real game = )
Excellent analysis, clear, concise and timely as always!
Thanks :)
still waiting for that germany mp guide!! elwolf, tfb and vannilla would be golden. Keep up the good work!
Thanks a lot, i have no countryguides in the pipeline atm, but im quite sure we will get there in time :)
Bro is an absolute legend thank you finally figuring it out! I am going to Post this vid in Hoi servers.
A big thanks to that and im happy to be able to help!
Ill be monitoring the chat today so if you have any questions about the video and the content, feel free to ask then and ill answer on my breaks
Imo one thing to take into account is how quickly can get to switch economy types. Being penalized for building civs or mils makes building inf more valuable. For Finland between first leader and a focus you get +40% inf speed. Now that only really anounts to like saving 6 days or so. That said there is a focus to give civ in up to 5 states with 3 inf. So doing at least that makes sense. In historical Finland my focus is using PP to get exp as fast as possible from advisor, attache, and also weekly manpower advisor. As such unless tske focuses giving PP changing econ law takes a bit longer.
Absolutely, when you can get away from civilian is really important, thats why i used Germany as an example, if infra is good for them, infra is good for everyone else since they have a better position to build other stuff
So glad you made this video! I've been building tons of infrastructure over the years because of the faster build times compounding over time but all based on guess-work. Great to see the work done properly! One thing I would add is that even provinces with few empty slots can benefit from infrastructure if they have high resources--builds mils quicker and saves you civs from trading at the same time!
Thanks! I agree resources is a important factor but there are so many variables and the video would have been at least 15 min longer. You have to calculate depending on when you need the resources and take into account from whom you are tradeing. In MP trade in your faction is usually the most beneficial (can depend on mods though). In singleplayer it will be some kind of reasoning about the AI:s possibly to handle those factories for your faction, and the AI is pretty bad :)
@@TheRealBoppus That's a good point about the AI. I find in single player I usually want to be as self-sufficient as possible. So as UK, for example, I max out infrastructure in British Guyana for aluminium (even though I could trade with Malaya cheaply for it). That may or may not be a good trade.
My typical build is starting with MILs in 100% infrastructure states, and if I have free CIVs, I pick an 80% state with substantial resources and build to 100% infra before starting a MIL chain there. So I go back and forth between MILs and infra for the first couple of years of the campaign.
Not having to trade away as many CIVs for goods also means that more of your CIVs are free to build things like radar, airbases, supply hubs and ports, which can, at times, be vital.
A final point: I often wonder if we focus too much on production sometimes in this game and find myself asking questions like "how many fighters do I not have to build if I build more radar/AA?" or "what technologies will allow me to win wars with less equipment?".
@@RobsRedHotSpotRegarding your final point i would say that it varies a lot between player and the game is to complex for anyone to strike the ultimate balance. But with that said, for me production is the core, how much can i produce and when can i produce it, in relation to what i need to accomplish. The when part is actually one of the hardest to nail.
Say as Germany in a historical setting. The earlier you have your equipment, the more you can accomplish in the early war, boosting your factories and resources and taking strategic point as Egypt, Gibraltar and even the UK.
That equipment will be decent by Barbarossa in 41 and quite bad in 43. How many bad rifles in 43 is owning egypt in 1940 worth.
I think thats where theory needs to meet actually experience in game, you can’t really make a calculator for that. But the calculator is a good piece in the puzzle
@@TheRealBoppus now with the ability to sell things on the market you can offload those bad guns on smaller states for construction so it's a good loss leader imo.
Great video!
Many thanks :)
Woah! This is great content!
Would you say it is worth building infrastructure for the supply gain or is your opinion that it's value is primarily in the build speed bonus?
Oh, thats a great question in its own right, i made the choice to leave reasources and supply of the analysis to keep the run time closer to 10 minutes than 30 :) I would say infra is worth building for the supply in certain situations but usually you dont build it for supply in the same area where you want to build industry so i think that will have to be another video entirely
great content!
Thanks :)
On a fresh 1936 start, I build up a foundational base industry from construction and/or focuses, and upon hitting the critical mass of 15 available civilian factories, I shift click to build max infrastructure in all my core states. After that, I reorganize my construction queue by which states I want built up first taking into consideration things like resources, building slots, base infrastructure level, focus trees, geography, etc. Then, I go back and add more industry to the construction queue and build max infrastructure, civilian factories, military factories, and/or dockyards in that order for each province until all the infrastructure and building slots get maxed out one region at a time. I usually have little to no issue with my factory output or industrial capacity doing this strategy even if playing economically underdeveloped minor powers. I don't know how optimal this shit is, but it works for me.
So for a country like the Soviets with only a couple of 80% infra states (Moscow and Leningrad), just max out those states, then build civs?
Thats right, if you have 15 civs buildning in a state, max that out first and then civs. And for the transition to Mils look at the Civ vs Mil video, im planning to do a new one that zooms in to Soviet and the US, but you can draw a lot of conclusions from the one thats already out :)
No, if you will build infra first you can´t rush economy focuses (they need 100, 120 factories to start). Don´t do it for Soviets, German early barb will block your economy focuses.
Ah, i play a lot of Soviet but always in MP and with the TFB mod. If you have focuses that depends on factories it seems like it would be better building factories. But i cant check in game right now
building 1 more infra in an 80% province is much faster than building 1 infra in a province with no infra.
Leningrad is a metropolis, and moscow a megalopolis, which means they get a rediculous amount of factory slots from tech. Building infra in them is a no-brainer.
if you want this to be genuinely helpful you should publish your script so people can spot issues like a lack of a juggling mechanism maybe (which effects results quite a lot) . I wrote one myself with py, im not a good programmer but i have like 6k hours so i think i understand the basics of economics in game, and i came to a different result. It also really depends on mod, sometimes you expect a boost of 30 civs in 40 as germany so your civ count later on matters more (together with total mob and 0 consumers). In an MP game Germany can get up to like 500 mills for barb depending on what garisson law they take. Idk if that is included, and idk what eco you gave germany for 40 and when exactly you gave it to them together with compliance and resistance and possible collabs. All of that matters a lot. I wrote a script that has all the states as a 2 dimensional array with factories and all the other important stuff like compliance and building slots and infra level, an automatic juggling mechanism and a mechanism that prefers Refs for high infra states, and I hardcoded all the research, focuses and events into the game (this is in fact heuristical but its pretty obvious that going total mob at war or getting construction tech is not a bad idea)
Thanks for a great comment. The way i did it was to just concentrate on the outcome of your own buildning strats and single that out. Mixing in everything else in this will just dilute the analysis here, because the question is, is infra worth buildning. So i testet how building infra effects your output. When i prepare for a game i do a total analysis of the country i play, but thats someting else, and then it matters a lot. There might be a future video about how i built my economy-simulator but its not inte the pipeline just yet :)
@@TheRealBoppus Fair enough, thanks for the reply! I definetly see your point now. I think its just important to have the caveat that other variables that might not have been included could potentially change the outcome. I saw people say that you need 100 factories as Russia for example (which is totally fair), but also for example the idea of economy laws, construction speed and other kind of scalings that actually dont just scale up the total ic equally but can also change the result (as in for example only building 3 or 2 infrastructure or more). That being said, I think we both had the same general idea, I love the idea of an economy script, I sadly dont have one that is generally applicable (I could make it that way but modding in all states as a python list is just too annoying for me to do ;) ) so it only applies to germany and all the state it conquers in Europe, but its still fun to test around. I also tried some basic machine learning on it, but lets not talk about how that went. Best regards
I totally agree that its really interesting and I might make more country-specific analyses in the future, but i wanted to start with a more generel approach :)
THANK YOUU
There will be more :)
Then when i play as Germany and the first 4 things I do is, set max infra in the rhineland and the Silesia region to make them "a industrial heartland" since they have a lot of resorses and Silesia has a lot of building slots, am i playing meta-ish? i build my civs in both of these regions mostly
i generally build infrastructure in areas that have 5 or more free slots, but there are a lot of variables of course. If you're unsure how many slots an area will have, use the "states" map mode to check the development of the state. Generally, anything worse than "developed rural region" is not worth your time.
Also, infrastructure and dockyards are things you can build efficiently on civilian economy.
Also, consider the long-term benefits of infrastructure in areas where you're planning to build miscellaneous stuff: radar stations, anti air, forts, air bases... supply points, even. Building a supply point with the 300% bonus from reorganize railway network is a huge deal, bcs the 2x bonus from infra stacks with any construction speed % bonuses.
Yeah, there’s a lot of things to consider, but to spare everyone from a 30 min video, I concentrated on the hard part, understanding effect on military output. You also have resources on top of all your points.
//TheRealBoppus
@@hyggegaming Well, hey; that's why we have a comment section ^^
Very true! :)
i often build infrastructure or dockyards when it takes like 600 days to build a single civ or mil
Yeah, there will be big differences on specific countries, like the USA. If it takes 600 days, something really bad has happened with your country :)
You can also spend pp if plentiful to increase slot.
Yeah, but i would say there usually is better things to spend PP on, but if you have plenty of them, why not :)
Granted this is great work. I have waited for somebody to notice... but. There are some mathematical problems here. 1. While you did a multidimensional approach this actually has many more dimensions here since most countries have obviously more slot lands at the start and date of building that infra is pushed later. So time dimension is a key here as are your economic law and building bonuses that make up to 45% difference. 2. Output at a time is inconsequential compared to the sum of production till that point. Having the factory produce at say 70% since May 1939 and having it produce since May 1936 is a difference of hundreds of infantry equipment. Similarly, you need to take / research / what equipment you need to make / production base and gain / etc. And of course, it would be impossible to make that many dimensions in a spreadsheet but I did have good results with databases and some simple scripting.
Thanks for the comment!
1. Im not sure i totaly follow the first part, but economy law, building bonuses, everything is in the spreadsheet, it simulates the game on a day to day basis, så if a factory is build in 26 sep 1936, it starts producing at the corret rate for that year according to tech, production cap, other bonuses.
2. I would say both are important and can be used to understand different things. In this video i made the choice to look att total military output to a certain date. If you look att the Civs vs Mil guide i show both parts since its really importat to know how modern equipment you could build.
Research, production base and gain and so forth, evertything is in the spreadsheet. Coming to which equipment you need is a part of the analysis you make later on with the economy as a base, perhaps makeing you go a path with lower output to actually be able to produce the thing you really need.
Regards /TheRealBoppus
@@hyggegaming I did not mean accounting to economy laws and bonuses and time. I understand that was done. I wanted to explain that it is flattened to a single dimension. And this is connected to the first part. Your spreadsheet would have to be multi-dimensional to account for that. It's a good approximation for certain strategy but the optimum would be a saddle point in multi-dimensional space. To sum it up it is far from that simple. There are many many situations when building infra would gain you a positive even using your total output metric. There are even some that would give you a positive net even when your spreadsheet says they would not. But there are some (not many) where they would not.
How much does the calculus change if you compare this against just building straight military factories from game start?
I needed some time to actually put this into the calculator. If you build infra first 80% to 100%, and then Mils, this is the results for Military-Factory-Output, by DoW +10%, by Barbarossa +1%, and by mid 1942 you will be 3% behind.
It was always the meta
I didn't understand a single bit of this. When you say "1 Infra, 1 slot" what the hell does that mean? Building a single military factory in a district with 20% infrastructure using one civilian factory? This is completely confusing. I understand that you are trying to determine whether it's better to build infrastructure before military factories, but other than that, I can't tell what the test results meant.
Wouldnt be infra good on countries like sweden where you start with only 7 building civs but you will not get out of civ eco any time soon ?
Without testing i would say probably not, since the states have few total slots both the tech will give you less opportunities and with just 7 the speedbuff wont be that great. If you are sure you will trade all steel perhaps Stockholm could be an alternative but usually you wont get that trade early on.
My bad its 7 before trade so it depends if you play sp or MP usually you can get 11-12 at minimum so its better then i thought. also there is province in south that has 2/6 slots used so it seems its worth at least for this state@@TheRealBoppus
I agree, that makes all the difference, i would go for infra in that state then
Interesting, coincidentally I'm now doing same as France 1936, because economy law anyway is bad. Just I still didn't catch your message: you build only if you have >8 potential free slots, right?
That part is a bit tricky.
Infra could be worth it even if you only have one free slot. What comes in to play then is the amount of total slots in that state.
In you have a state with 10 slots which just one is free to build on. You will get two more slots each time you tech up your industry, and thats why it works. Because even if you just have one free slot in 1936, you will get a lot more slots along the way because of the 20% factories in state tech bonus
@@hyggegaming ok, but then sorry I still don't get it why talk about total slot: besides resources (which is also an excellent topic why infra can be good) I still don't understand why higher infra modifies existing economy (CIV and MIL?).
"15 CIV buildings in a state" sentence is still puzzling me. If I understand, having 15 available CIVs (and multiple) dedicated to construction is most optimal for building. But we don't care where these CIVs are, no? As long as the country has available CIV (from different states), then it makes sense to first build infra within a state and then build CIV/MIC in that same state. That's what I found, but your message seems a bit different.
What im trying to say there is that the worth of infra is dependent of how many Civs that can build in the state where you constructed your infra. So no, it doesn’t matter where the civs is located, just how many that can build in the statw where you are investing in infrastructure.
If you are interested in more economy content, we have just started our patreon with the possibility to after a while also request subjects for upcoming guides among a lot of other great stuff
@@hyggegamingthanks, now I got you
@@hyggegaming I'mm also finding it hard to understand, when you mean 15 Civs you're talking about 15 free slots? Or the 15/15 max Civs that can be alocated to a task at any given time? As in the ammount of Civs I have? So nations that start with less than 15 shouldnt build Infra?
Your simualtion seems to have a fatal flaw: you are assuming that you get 2 slots for every level of disp/conc which you dont. Yes infra is worth in some places but it is completely redundant for slots where you cant fit 6-7 civs and 11-13 mills
Rule of thumb, build infra where you want 3 refs + 1 civ(2-3 mills) or big resource states like guyana, northern ontario ect.
Infra for mills is usually pretty worthless (some exceptions like orenburg and ufa)
Cloak has made an amazing spreadsheet calculating this (which you apparently disregarded as wrong while not even testing in game???) If you want to calculate exact states
Building infra everywhere is just a waste of ic.
It’s not a flaw, its a assumption which i explain in the video so everyone can get a referencepoint. The numbers will be different depending on total buildslots in the province you want to build in, but giving a total analysis about that factor would just bloated the video.
So the examle are a 10 slot state giving 2 extra slots each tech. So you can draw the conclusion that its valid on a 9 alot state, all above 10 slots but probably not a 2 slot state.
Im not shure where your rule of thumb is from, but building infrastructure for mils is absolutely worth it, more so than civs for mils. Refineries can be nice in SP, but mostly wasted in MP in my opinion.
I’ve seen his spreadsheet and it’s great work, love his stuff, but it lacks many dimensions to really understand how it will work in game.
//TheRealBoppus
Der står du er fra Danmark i din profil men du lyder mere svensk? 😅
Those involved in the channel are all swedish, but one of us has moved to Copenhagen and he’s the one who set up the acccount :)
test biased?
"infra then civs till a date, then mills means, that first mills grow faster, boosting the number.
made a test, build 6 infra, then up to 90 civs (incl some cheated industry techs up to 1939 directly to KdF focus, then nothing), then mills vs same without infra.
no infra won 12.8 to 12.2 tanks(20cost)
Hard to say why with that data.
Did you build 6 infra in one state, different states, that has a huge impact. How many open slots did those states start with. When did you compare the military output. When did you start building military factories?
//TheRealBoppus
Long Swedish waffling intro. The result is shown at 8:00. Save yourself 11 minutes.
Important topic but it is really unclear what you say and you are missing so many basic aspects that I find this really not worthy to trust.
Basically you don't get "2 slots with every tech" but you get +20%, so it really depends on type of urban area of province.
If province has 1 slot but it is a megalopolis (12 starting slots), it is much bettter than having 4 slots on developed rural (4 starting slots), because first one in 1939 will have 1+7 = 8 slots, and second will be 4+2 = 6 slots.
You also don't count that Civs and Mils have different prize, so depends on which you build, building infra is profitable not the same.
My rule of thumb is:
- build 2 infra is good if you going to build 8 civs or 6 mils in the province with 1939 tech.
- build 1 infra is good for half that amount.
- and if it has important resource, build infra almost always.
For Germany it means that I build infra for every province besides shore provinces (for which I sometimes do, sometimes dont).
And I can get over 600 factories on Barbarossa assuming historical conquest.
The 2 slots from tech was in the example i set up with 10 slot in the state where i build. The important message there was how many extra slots you can get in those high slot states event though there is few available at the start of the game.
The calculator i use absolutely have the different pricepoints for building infra, civs and mils plus different buildspeed on each depending on buffs/debuffs for each type.
For the amount of factories, i know that its a common way to measure strategy but i would say that its usually misleading and tends to overemphasise civilians instead of mils.
Thats why my economy simulator focuses on actually production of equipment. The amount of factories is of course something that corresponds to that, but with early mils you will field a bigger army and increase you chances of a quick victories.
And lastly, thanks for commenting, i love the subject and could discuss HOI4 economy all day = )
@@TheRealBoppus I can discuss all day long as well :)
So in how many provinces would you build infra as Soviet ? ;)
@@MaciekKleczar I was looking around, was a long time ago I played Soviets in vanilla and I realise that i might need to do a follow-up and test the same thing for 5 slot-states, since technology will only get half the effect there in comparison to the 10 slot-states i tested for in my video